A New Heaven And A New Earth

[fivesense]

The celestials are inhabited by God, by us as elect sons and daughters of the new creation (Rev 21), as well as the Adversary.

Eph 6:12 For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high [places]

If this were not so, then there would be no need of reconcilation.

Col 1:20 And, having made peace through the blood of his cross, by him to reconcile all things unto himself; by him, [I say], whether [they be] things in earth, or things in heaven.

Until he is cast out and bound for a thousand years, the enemy retains his post in the heavenlies.

Re 20:2 And he laid hold on the dragon, that old serpent, which is the Devil, and Satan, and bound him a thousand years,
Re 20:3 And cast him into the bottomless pit, and shut him up, and set a seal upon him, that he should deceive the nations no more, till the thousand years should be fulfilled: and after that he must be loosed a little season.

As to "repairing" the earth and the heavens, God has spoken against a figurative interpretation in Revelations 21:

Re 21:5 And he that sat upon the throne said, Behold, I make all things new. And he said unto me, Write: for these words are true and faithful.

Between Peter's testimony by Holy Spirit and that same Holy Spirit speaking in Revelations 21, it is a precarious position to be in, not believing God will perform what He has said He will do. It is, in fact, a loosing proposition.

fivesense

 

[fivesense]

The 3 heavens are not "levels", they are placed in time. Genesis, now, and the new.

God is Spirit, the force behind the atom as Martin has suggested in his post. All things proceed out of God, in Whom we live, and move and have our being. He did not create the universe out of "nothingness", a virtual and divine impossibility. Everything is out of God.

2C 5:18 And all things [are] of God, who hath reconciled us to himself by Jesus Christ, and hath given to us the ministry of reconciliation;

Ro 11:36 For of him, and through him, and to him, [are] all things: to whom [be] glory for ever. Amen.

It is no major thing to recreate all things new, retaining to Himself those things He has sanctified previously, and starting all over again to be able to abide in and among His creation. Those who have loved Him unreservedly with their whole hearts will enjoy their Father and His Son immensely and immortally. It is their reward for believing what He has spoken.

fivesense

 

[brionne]

I assume that you are not saying that God’s throne exists in our sky? Or do you subscribe to the idea that God’s throne is off in some corner of our physical universe?

Not at all. The hebrew word sha‧ma′yim is rendered “heaven(s),” and its use in the scriptures is always in the sense of 'being on high' So its not necessarily a physical place at all...its a position. That is why some of the prophetic language of the bible puts the earthly kings in the position of the 'heavens' such as at Isaiah 14:12 with reference to Nebudchadnezza.

Gods throne is in the highest position therefore it is in a 'heavenly place' Ephesians 1:3
I would never say that it is in our physical universe because God does not dwell in our physical universe...he cant, he's a spirit and dwells in a completely different realm to us.

If this is the case, then you have a real problem in that God creates the heavens in Genesis 1 unless you assume that the angels, etc, where created after this (since they’d have nowhere to go)?

Moses did not use the word Shamyim in genesis when he mentioned the creation of our atmosphere. He used a different word meaning 'expanse' The hebrew word is ra‧qi′a‛ at Genesis 1:6-8.

Gen 1:6 "and·he-is-saying Elohim he-shall-become (rqio) atmosphere in·midst-of the·waters..."
So the sky that God created is not the same as the 'heavens' where he dwells. If we look up at the sky, that is not heaven/shamayim....that is sky/raquia our atmosphere.

Also, the term “paradise” occurs three times in NT scripture. It’s an oriental word meaning “parks” or “walled place” that passed into use in Greek. I cannot see how it’s use or not changes our discussion. What is really interesting is that in the Septuagint it is the word used for the Garden of Eden.

Thats quite right. The term 'paradise' certainly does mean 'park/garden' Thats why when Jesus told the criminal on the stake next to him that he would be in paradise, Jesus didnt mean the man would be in heaven....he meant the man would be in a garden/park or 'garden of eden'

Now the earth is certainly not a garden of eden yet, but that doesnt mean that it cannot become one. This is really what we need to understand about Gods purpose for the earth. he always intended for the earth to be a beautiful paradise. He placed Adam and Eve in a paradise and told them to become many and fill the earth....well the earth to them was the paradise they lived in. God always intended for the earth to become a paradise full of worshipers of him. That will become a reality after he cleanses the current earth of those who do not wish to work in harmony with Gods purpose. The earth will be 'renewed' but it wont be destroyed...you dont tear down you house and build a new one just because you have some cracks in the walls....you fix the cracks.

The 3 heavens are not "levels", they are placed in time. Genesis, now, and the new.

fivesense

yes that does make a lot of sense, cheers.

And it fits with Pauls words about seeing the '3rd heaven' because in the future God will make all things new and the paradise that Paul mentioned must be the earth in the state that God planned... back to the garden of eden.

 

[fivesense]

yes that does make a lot of sense, cheers.

And it fits with Pauls words about seeing the '3rd heaven' because in the future God will make all things new and the paradise that Paul mentioned must be the earth in the state that God planned... back to the garden of eden.

You have fit the Pegg in the hole. Indeed, the thief will be with the Lord in paradise, the new earth of the John's Unveiling. While he enjoys the presence of God among all people on earth, we, the elect Body will have been performing divine service as immortal spirit beings for over a thousand years already. It will be most gratifying for those on the earth, to be with the Lord in Paradise, but the elect Body will not share in those blessings, the reward of being spiritual sons and daughters far outweighing anything terrestrial, no matter how perfect and beautiful. Our brilliance, our glory, our place as new creations formed in the image and likeness of the Son of God will not be confined to the physical realms. Ours is to display the glory of the Lord to the universe without limits

fivesense

 

[Grat]

The 3 heavens are not "levels", they are placed in time. Genesis, now, and the new.

So, just to clarify what you are saying, paul was effectively a time traveler when he received his vision of the third heaven?

 

[fivesense]

So, just to clarify what you are saying, paul was effectively a time traveler when he received his vision of the third heaven?

You mock.

fivesense

 

[Grat]

You mock.

fivesense

Actually I don't.

I’m honestly trying to grasp what you are saying.
My understanding of what you are saying (and I’m repeating this to you so you can correct any misunderstanding) is that the 3 heavens Paul refers to is the same place, but at different times in history.
The first heaven is the heaven at the time of the Garden, the second is the same heaven as viewed in our current time and the third heaven is the same locale, but as it will appear after Christ’s return?
The reference to time travel was simply my way of shortening this down to say that Paul’s vision/journey of the third heaven was him viewing the singular heaven across time, as distinct from my understanding which is that he was viewing a different locale but in the same time frame (as much as God can be said to occupy a time frame - but that's an argument for another day). It was never meant to be disparaging, mocking or indeed negitive in any way.

 

[brionne]

You have fit the Pegg in the hole. Indeed, the thief will be with the Lord in paradise, the new earth of the John's Unveiling. While he enjoys the presence of God among all people on earth, we, the elect Body will have been performing divine service as immortal spirit beings for over a thousand years already. It will be most gratifying for those on the earth, to be with the Lord in Paradise, but the elect Body will not share in those blessings, the reward of being spiritual sons and daughters far outweighing anything terrestrial, no matter how perfect and beautiful. Our brilliance, our glory, our place as new creations formed in the image and likeness of the Son of God will not be confined to the physical realms. Ours is to display the glory of the Lord to the universe without limits

fivesense

Yes its going to be a wonderful time indeed. Although im not of the elect, i'll be looking forward to living in the earthly paradise...it will be a privilege to be among those who fulfill Gods purpose for the earth....and im kind of looking forward to meeting Noah because i really want to know how he built that boat lol

So, just to clarify what you are saying, paul was effectively a time traveler when he received his vision of the third heaven?

all the prophets who saw visions were time travellers in that they were given visions of the future

think of John...he saw what would occur in the last days, the war in heaven, satan being cast into the abyss, death being ended and a great crowd of earthly subjects drinking from the river of life
Daniel saw visions of the last days as did many other prophets....thats exactly what prophets see - the future.

It makes perfect sense that John saw a vision of the future.

 

[fivesense]

Actually I don't.

I’m honestly trying to grasp what you are saying.
My understanding of what you are saying (and I’m repeating this to you so you can correct any misunderstanding) is that the 3 heavens Paul refers to is the same place, but at different times in history.
The first heaven is the heaven at the time of the Garden, the second is the same heaven as viewed in our current time and the third heaven is the same locale, but as it will appear after Christ’s return?
The reference to time travel was simply my way of shortening this down to say that Paul’s vision/journey of the third heaven was him viewing the singular heaven across time, as distinct from my understanding which is that he was viewing a different locale but in the same time frame (as much as God can be said to occupy a time frame - but that's an argument for another day). It was never meant to be disparaging, mocking or indeed negitive in any way.

I am sorry Grat, I am not accustomed to that type of humor(?). Usually, when someone of your calibre and abilities makes light of the things of God, I get taken aback, assuming the worst. My fault.

I offer this for your consideration, and I am satisfied it is scripturally sound and accurate. The problem will arise with the Hebrew interpretation side. I prefer the most literal translations, for then the student is left to decide on his own the meaning and the context. The Holy Spirit is potent in this respect.


Gn 1:1 . In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.

Gn 1:2 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness [was] upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.


The KJV renders verse 2 interpretively. It literally says, "the earth she became chaos and vacant". It is my opinion that this was the result of the casting out of the Adversary and his minions in their rebellion against the Son of God as the Logos (Rev 12). It was no accident or unexpected event. In any case, such an occurence would involve great turbulence in all spheres physical and celestial. This was the end of the first earth and heaven. Peter renders the account this way:

2Pt 3:5-6 For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water: Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished:

Then Peter goes on to confirm that we are now in another period with a different earth and heaven:

2Pt 3:7 But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.

Going on in his letter, he advances to the prophetic utterance of Isaiah being fulfilled, and the vision of John confirming it, that there will come a new heaven and a new earth to replace the one we presently inhabit:

2Pt 3:13 Nevertheless we, according to his promise, look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness

Isa 65:17 . For, behold, I create new heavens and a new earth: and the former shall not be remembered, nor come into mind.

Re 21:1 . And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea.

As the first earth had no sea, so also the third earth shall have no sea. As to the presence of water, I have found no reference that dictates its exact placement in the recreated period. I do not know that it will be needed if God's spirit is pervasive.

These are not "same locales", these are new creations. The first was created but became chaos and vacant, the second took its place.The second heaven and earth will melt with fervent heat, and the third takes the place of this present earth and heaven.

Heaven is a creation. It is not Spirit. It came forth out of God, as did all things created. That it can suffer the same fate as the earth speaks of similarity. Though God's throne is in the celestials, those invisible attributes of creation are not God. They proceed out of Him.

Once again, forgive me for assuming you were mocking. Being wry is no crime, though that is what I perceived it to be. Bear with me while I acclimate to your strengths.

fivesense

 

[Paul]

So, just to clarify what you are saying, paul was effectively a time traveler when he received his vision of the third heaven?

Yes, Grat, and so was John but what is time to God?

 

[Grat]

Yes, Grat, and so was John but what is time to God?

I was trying to keep it simple.
To me one of the biggest problem with getting things straight is we are dealing with a God outside of time. One who sees all of time as NOW. If I was ever to truly manage to grasp God in all His fullness this side of perfection all I would accomplish is a brain amorism.

 

[fivesense]

I was trying to keep it simple.
To me one of the biggest problem with getting things straight is we are dealing with a God outside of time. One who sees all of time as NOW. If I was ever to truly manage to grasp God in all His fullness this side of perfection all I would accomplish is a brain amorism.

Seeing that He is the "I am", the God of the living and not the God of the dead, and He is with us second by second, does the concept of a "God outside of time", an unscriptural idea and unbiblical, have any merit beyond attempting to describe something that does not exist?

Is He not instantly here? now? never departing, always present, animating all things to the nano-second to sustain His creation, upholding it by the power of His word?

Would not this qualify Him as being very much "inside" time? I realize the Holy Scriptures do not discuss this concept at all, but I cannot perceive Him to be apart from His creation and "outside" of it in any way, time or otherwise, since His presence is absolutely required for all things to exist. To me, as an unscriptural concept anyway, this would place Him directly "inside of time".

These are not inspired thoughts I have, neither do they necessarily edify, but I offer them just the same.

fivesense

I, too, can only imagine without getting an aneurism of the brain.

 

[Paul]

Seeing that He is the "I am", the God of the living and not the God of the dead, and He is with us second by second, does the concept of a "God outside of time", an unscriptural idea and unbiblical, have any merit beyond attempting to describe something that does not exist?

Is He not instantly here? now? never departing, always present, animating all things to the nano-second to sustain His creation, upholding it by the power of His word?

Would not this qualify Him as being very much "inside" time? I realize the Holy Scriptures do not discuss this concept at all, but I cannot perceive Him to be apart from His creation and "outside" of it in any way, time or otherwise, since His presence is absolutely required for all things to exist. To me, as an unscriptural concept anyway, this would place Him directly "inside of time".

These are not inspired thoughts I have, neither do they necessarily edify, but I offer them just the same.

fivesense

I, too, can only imagine without getting an aneurism of the brain.

If you consider God's name from Ex 3: 14: 'ehyeh 'asher 'ehyeh it is the complete declension of the verb form "to be" which is a continuous verb stretching from the past through eternity. It has no beginning and no ending. Our minds are unable to fathom these things.

I AM (H1961) THAT (H834) I AM: (H1961) and

I WILL BE WHAT I WILL BE and

I have been what I have been

H1961
היה
hâyâh
haw-yaw'
A primitive root (compare H1933); to exist, that is, be or become, come to pass (always emphatic, and not a mere copula or auxiliary): - beacon, X altogether, be (-come, accomplished, committed, like), break, cause, come (to pass), continue, do, faint, fall, + follow, happen, X have, last, pertain, quit (one-) self, require, X use.

H834
אשׁר
'ăsher
ash-er'
A primitive relative pronoun (of every gender and number); who, which, what, that; also (as adverb and conjunction) when, where, how, because, in order that, etc.: - X after, X alike, as (soon as), because, X every, for, + forasmuch, + from whence, + how (-soever), X if, (so) that ([thing] which, wherein), X though, + until, + whatsoever, when, where (+ -as, -in, -of, -on, -soever, -with), which, whilst, + whither (-soever), who (-m, -soever, -se). As it is indeclinable, it is often accompanied by the personal pronoun expletively, used to show the connection.

 

[evanom]

The new Jerusalem is not heaven nor heaven on Earth. The new Jerusalem is a city, but more specifically it is known as the bride of the Lamb. You see, New Jerusalem, Bride of the Lamb/Christ, Zion, Church are all synonyms: they are the same thing. Once a new earth is in place, the new city will descend upon it. Yeshua will establish His throne there. It will be a sort of capitol of the world. Again, it's a city. To understand the whole fold of events involving the New Jerusalem, you have to understand and study the fold of events of a jewish wedding.

 

[fivesense]

The new Jerusalem is not heaven nor heaven on Earth. The new Jerusalem is a city, but more specifically it is known as the bride of the Lamb. You see, New Jerusalem, Bride of the Lamb/Christ, Zion, Church are all synonyms: they are the same thing. Once a new earth is in place, the new city will descend upon it. Yeshua will establish His throne there. It will be a sort of capitol of the world. Again, it's a city. To understand the whole fold of events involving the New Jerusalem, you have to understand and study the fold of events of a jewish wedding.

Let us look and see.

Re 21:2 And I John saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband.

"as a bride" is not "the Bride". It is figurative describing quality, not content. It does not say, The bride of the Lamb adorned for her husband, it says, AS a bride.
Babylon is figured as a woman as well. It is figurative, not literal. Yet we know Babylon will be a literal place from which the apostate Jews will carry out their commerce and control, the present Jerusalem being to hotly contested for by the enemy and his lesser minions of war, therefore unfit for their plans to rule without the presence of Messiah, Jesus Christ.

Your contention that," Jerusalem, Bride of the Lamb/Christ, Zion, Church are all synonyms", is not like you Evenom. You are more sufficient of yourself in study and understanding to put forth such an assertion. It would be too easy to dispute this with the multitude of Scriptures disproving such a claim, and space will not allow for it. I ask you to be honest here, and allow God's word to precede conjecture as being truth.

Though you are correct to point out the New Jerusalem is not heaven, nor heaven on earth, it is nonetheless, heavenly in character, for in it dwells God amongst the people of His creation. It is temporary in existence, not being the consummation of His plan to become All in all.

You say that understanding the Jewish wedding assists in coming to a realization of the Bride analogy, and you are most correct. The Bride of Christ, the faithful Jewish dead of the former resurrection and the elect Jewish remanant saved of the tribulation period, do indeed comprise the Bride of Christ, who are on the earth already when He returns to judge the nations. It is totally Jewish, and there is no contingent of the nations or Gentiles. It is comprised of His people alone.

His throne is established prior to the New Jerusalem descending out of heaven to earth, not after. His rule and reign is one of judgment and justice, to the end of reconciling all things. Until that reconciliation takes place and the enemy is finally deposed after being loosed for a season, the God of Heaven cannot dwell upon His earth.

Re 19:7 Let us be glad and rejoice, and give honour to him: for the marriage of the Lamb is come, and his wife hath made herself ready.

I would assume that the Lamb is not going to marry a place of habitation, the New Jerusalem in this case, over His betrothed adulterous wife, Israel. It is totally unreasonable to conclude He is marrying a "thing". In the Gospels the references to the Bride and the Bridegroom, adultery, whoredoms, and such like, should present the clearest evidence of the nature of the Bride of the Lamb.That is unless we gravitate towards the unsoundness of "spiritualizing" difficult declarations of God, for the various reasons towards accomodating our notions.

fivesense

The new Jerusalem is not heaven nor heaven on Earth. The new Jerusalem is a city, but more specifically it is known as the bride of the Lamb. You see, New Jerusalem, Bride of the Lamb/Christ, Zion, Church are all synonyms: they are the same thing. Once a new earth is in place, the new city will descend upon it. Yeshua will establish His throne there. It will be a sort of capitol of the world. Again, it's a city. To understand the whole fold of events involving the New Jerusalem, you have to understand and study the fold of events of a jewish wedding.

Let us look and see.

Re 21:2 And I John saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband.

"as a bride" is not "the Bride". It is figurative describing quality, not content. It does not say, The bride of the Lamb adorned for her husband, it says, AS a bride.
Babylon is figured as a woman as well. It is figurative, not literal. Yet we know Babylon will be a literal place from which the apostate Jews will carry out their commerce and control, the present Jerusalem being to hotly contested for by the enemy and his lesser minions of war, therefore unfit for their plans to rule without the presence of Messiah, Jesus Christ.

Your contention that," Jerusalem, Bride of the Lamb/Christ, Zion, Church are all synonyms", is not like you Evenom. You are more sufficient of yourself in study and understanding to put forth such an assertion. It would be too easy to dispute this with the multitude of Scriptures disproving such a claim, and space will not allow for it. I ask you to be honest here, and allow God's word to precede conjecture as being truth.

Though you are correct to point out the New Jerusalem is not heaven, nor heaven on earth, it is nonetheless, heavenly in character, for in it dwells God amongst the people of His creation. It is temporary in existence, not being the consummation of His plan to become All in all.

You say that understanding the Jewish wedding assists in coming to a realization of the Bride analogy, and you are most correct. The Bride of Christ, the faithful Jewish dead of the former resurrection and the elect Jewish remanant saved of the tribulation period, do indeed comprise the Bride of Christ, who are on the earth already when He returns to judge the nations. It is totally Jewish, and there is no contingent of the nations or Gentiles. It is comprised of His people alone.

His throne is established prior to the New Jerusalem descending out of heaven to earth, not after. His rule and reign is one of judgment and justice, to the end of reconciling all things. Until that reconciliation takes place and the enemy is finally deposed after being loosed for a season, the God of Heaven cannot dwell upon His earth.

Re 19:7 Let us be glad and rejoice, and give honour to him: for the marriage of the Lamb is come, and his wife hath made herself ready.

I would assume that the Lamb is not going to marry a place of habitation, the New Jerusalem in this case, over His betrothed adulterous wife, Israel. It is totally unreasonable to conclude He is marrying a "thing". In the Gospels the references to the Bride and the Bridegroom, adultery, whoredoms, and such like, should present the clearest evidence of the nature of the Bride of the Lamb.That is unless we gravitate towards the unsoundness of "spiritualizing" difficult declarations of God, for the various reasons towards accomodating our notions.

fivesense